MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2346547465

La Implementación del Estatuto de Roma en la Región Andina: los Casos de Bolivia, Colombia y Perú (The Implementation of the Rome Statute in the Andean Region: A Case-Study on Bolivia, Colombia and Peru)

2005· article· es· W2346547465 on OpenAlexaff
Salvador Herencia Carrasco

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Penology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDerechoPolitical scienceStatuteHumanitiesGeographyCartographyLawPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spanish Abstract: El Estatuto de Roma de la Corte Penal Internacional (CPI) se ha constituido en un instrumento fundamental para el desarrollo del Derecho Internacional a fin de lograr una efectiva proteccion de los derechos humanos y del derecho internacional humanitario. Sin embargo, es necesario destacar que la obligacion de investigar y sancionar los crimenes de genocidio, de lesa humanidad y de guerra recae primordialmente en los Estados, por lo que la CPI solo asumira competencia en la medida en que no existan voluntad politica o los medios necesarios para administrar justicia.Para cumplir con esta obligacion, es necesario que se adopten reformas tendientes a incorporar los postulados del tratado en los ordenamientos juridicos internos. El presente libro formula propuestas en el ambito constitucional, penal y procesal de Bolivia, Colombia y Peru, en aras de adecuar sus sistemas a este nuevo mecanismo de justicia internacional.Es asi que se analizan los principios generales del Estatuto de Roma, los crimenes de competencia de la CPI y los mecanismos de cooperacion judicial frente a la legislacion existente, proponiendo alternativas que contribuyan a la lucha contra la impunidad y la incorporacion de los postulados del Derecho Penal Internacional.English Abstract: The book analyzes the challenges regarding the implementation of International Criminal Law within the national legislation of Bolivia, Colombia and Peru. Although published in 2005, the main findings remain valid as these countries are yet to fully implement the Rome Statute.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.145
Threshold uncertainty score0.288

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.343 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicCriminal Justice and PenologyFrench-language works237,207